Bardish ChaggerLiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism

Mr. Speaker, our government is firmly committed to transforming question period to make all MPs, including the Prime Minister, more accountable. We made that promise to Canadians last election along with other general measures to modernize Parliament.

As the member said, yesterday the Prime Minister answered all of the questions in question period. That was to demonstrate how committed we are to bringing about real change. We hope that all members will weigh in on this.

Mr. Speaker, both opposition House leaders have made a fair and reasonable proposal that we follow the model that Jean Chrétien used for his parliamentary modernization. It included one member from each party and it was chaired by the deputy speaker.

Let me quote from the committee's mandate, “the committee shall not adopt any report without the unanimous agreement of all the Members of the committee”. If it was good enough for Jean Chrétien's majority Liberals, why does the minister believe her majority government is so much more entitled?

Bardish ChaggerLiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism

Mr. Speaker, this government campaigned on a commitment to Canadians to bring real change to Ottawa and to have their voices heard in this place. That is exactly why we want to have a conversation with all members of Parliament.

We know the important work the committee does and we want it to continue to do that important work. The discussion paper was meant to build upon the work the committee was already doing, to have important conversations and discussions so we could modernize the way this place worked and to bring it into the 21st century workplace. I encourage all members to share their points of view, and I look forward to hearing them.

Mr. Speaker, one starts a conversation by telling the truth, and the truth is that in the last election the Liberals had exactly two promises regarding Standing Order changes, which were to prohibit omnibus bills, and to prohibit parliamentary secretaries from sitting on committees. There was nothing there about four-day work weeks. There was nothing there about the Prime Minister turning up once a week. There was nothing there about limiting debate in committees.

Therefore, this story that somehow the opposition would be practising a veto on the government's election mandate is just nonsense. Why does the government continue to perpetrate this kind of nonsense in its so-called conversation?

Bardish ChaggerLiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism

Mr. Speaker, what is the case in regard to the discussion paper will remain the case in regard to the platform on which we ran. It is important that members read the document in its entirety. Many commitments were made in the platform to Canadians to respond to the very real concerns people had. These concerns we were responding to were in direct response to the approach the previous government took in this place.

What we know is that it is important for all members of Parliament to have an important conversation on the Standing Orders to modernize this place. This government has already been taking action. What we are saying is that if we could codify those in the Standing Orders, not only could we hold this government—

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister staged a one-man play worthy of Shakespeare. Let me repeat a few lines: “I want to work with the members”; “People expect us to work together in a respectful manner”; “It is perfectly reasonable to want to work with hon. members”.

The Prime Minister is generous with his words, but short on action. We all know that the Liberals want to unilaterally change our rules in their favour. The unanimous consent of all members is needed to change the rules.

Bardish ChaggerLiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, we hope that all members will share their perspectives regarding our ideas and how to integrate them into the Standing Orders of the House of Commons. I know that we can work together. I encourage all members to join the conversation. I think it is an important conservation to have.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence is willing to stifle, silence, and outright contradict government and military officials, all to save face for the Prime Minister. Despite what the defence minister says, official documents prove there is no capability gap in our fighter fleet, it was the Liberals who cut danger pay to our troops, and our allies were not happy with the decision of the Liberals to withdraw our CF18s from the fight against ISIS.

When will the Minister of National Defence admit he is misleading Canadians, and put an end to his dirty little habit?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question, but not all the language he used. We are committed to ensuring we deliver for our troops. When we looked at the massive cuts that were made by the previous government, we conducted a defence policy review. That is why we are going to be ensuring, when we launch the defence policy review, that we have the appropriate investments in looking after our Canadian Armed Forces and our men and women who serve us into the future.

Mr. Speaker, the minister is an expert in “alternative facts”. First, our allies did not like Canada's new mission in Iraq and asked that we continue our air strikes. Second, Canada is not in need of fighter jets. This is a Liberal invention to offer Boeing a nice $7 billion contract. Third, the Canadian Armed Forces urgently need equipment, but the Liberals cut the procurement budget by $12 billion and silence everyone involved with a lifetime gag order.

What percentage of the minister's answers are not “alternative facts”?

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the member opposite that last year I also stated that the fight in Iraq could not happen from the air, that it had to happen from the ground. That is when we tripled our trainers and doubled the intelligence. I am happy to say that it is actually having an impact on the ground right now. That is one of the reasons we are having that success on the ground.

We are going to ensure our troops have all the appropriate equipment. We are going to be launching a full competition to replace our entire fleet. When we launch our new defence policy, we will be outlining to Canadians and to all parliamentarians our plan to look after the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, Peter Cleary, the health minister's former senior adviser, has joined Santis Health, a registered lobbying firm that exclusively lobbies the federal government on behalf of health care clients. Not only was he her former adviser, but he was personally lobbied by Santis Health numerous times in 2017. He will now be the one lobbying the Liberals.

Does the minister think it is acceptable for one of her senior staff to immediately accept a position with a company that is actively lobbying her and her department?

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member would assume, the person he referred to, who is no longer working in my office, obviously met with the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to discuss arrangements. Everything about his new position was cleared with the commissioner. The staff member will not be lobbying our government.

Mr. Speaker, not only does Peter Cleary's new job raise red flags, but it turns out that all of Santis Health's principals worked closely with the Prime Minister's chief of staff and principal secretary at Queen's Park. Not only are they registered to lobby the Minister of Health, they also lobby the PMO.

How can Canadians believe that a prime minister, who only makes decisions that benefits his friends, will not allow the PMO to be lobbied by its friends at Santis Health?

Mr. Speaker, I certainly encourage the member opposite to not manufacture a concern that is not based on fact. The person about whom he is speaking has cleared this new position, and it is very clear he will not be lobbying this government.

Mr. Speaker, for months now, the federal pay services has been a complete shambles. Some people are being paid twice as much, others are not being paid at all and must borrow money to buy groceries.

Normally, the managers responsible for such a mess should be rapped on the knuckles, but what do the Liberals do? They give out bonuses, yes sir, and we are not talking small peanuts: $5 million of our money to reward people who are incapable of paying employees.

Is this the Liberal way of managing: rewarding the foolish and incompetent?

Steven MacKinnonLiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement

Mr. Speaker, as parliamentary secretary and as the MP for Gatineau, I can assure my colleague that resolving the Phoenix pay system problems left by our previous government is our highest priority. I would like to remind the hon. member that the executives—

Order, please. Most members, on all sides, are able to listen to question period and hear things they do not like without reacting, without saying anything until it is their turn. I encourage others to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I have been flipping through the Liberal platform, which has been nominated for several prestigious Canadian fiction awards, by the way, yet nowhere in this fantasy does it say anything about shovelling out millions of dollars for private company bonuses. I cannot seem to find the chapter that talks about paying millions more in bonuses to government executives who screwed up the lives of 82,000 public servants.

When will the Liberals actually start helping working people in the country, instead of the wealthy and well-connected? Frankly, Canadians are getting tired of this old Liberal story.

Steven MacKinnonLiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement

Mr. Speaker, I can assure my hon. colleague that Canadians are welcoming the fact that we will fix this pay system, which we inherited from the Conservatives, that we will honour our public servants with respect, and that we will pay them on time with a pay system they demand.

Perhaps my hon. colleague would be better off asking the Leader of the Opposition why, on March 12, 2012, she said that Phoenix “not only ensures the sustainability and increased efficiency of pay services for the Government of Canada, but also generates savings for Canadian taxpayers”.

We know that Transport Canada requires candidates for this job to be experienced in transportation, especially marine transportation. However, that experience is nowhere to be found on her resume. In fact, she's an estate planner. Maybe she plans burials at sea?

Will the minister just admit that Jennifer Stebbing's only qualification for this job is that she's a Liberal?

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to answer this question. I hope my colleague is actually listening.

Jennifer Stebbing is an outstanding choice, with vast professional governance and community experience, serving leadership positions in the Halton law association, the Hamilton-Halton Women's Lawyers Association, and the Hamilton Taxpayer Coalition, of which she is president.

We all know how important it is for port authorities to work with neighbouring residents to address the needs of the port, as well as those of local communities.